Precedent definition
Precedent here means a prior, observed pattern of behavior. It differs from the legal
Precedent. As conditions precedent to all of Distributor’s obligations hereunder.
(a) Chain of Title: Company shall submit to Distributor the chain of title for the Picture in form and substance to the satisfaction of Distributor including, without limitation, a current copyright report and current title report and opinion (i.e., both reports to be dated within three (3) months of the Delivery Date [as defined below]) indicating that the title is clear for use.
(b) Documentation of Ownership: Company shall submit documentation of ownership interest and/or ability to enter into a binding agreement with Distributor.
Precedent the conditions precedent set forth in the section headed “The Share Purchase Agreement – Conditions Precedent” of this announcement, or one or some of them if the context so requires “connected person(s)” has the meaning ascribed to it in the Listing Rules “Director(s)” the director(s) of the Company
Examples of Precedent in a sentence
Each Party shall promptly inform the other Party when any Condition Precedent for which it is responsible has been satisfied.
The cost of any remedial, corrective or other action contemplated by the preceding sentence in respect of any of the Environmental Conditions Precedent to Foreclosure that is not satisfied shall not be an expense of the Servicer and the Servicer shall not be required to expend or risk its own funds or otherwise incur any financial liability in connection with any such action.
No Issuer shall otherwise be required to determine that, or take notice whether, the conditions precedent set forth in Section 3.2 (Conditions Precedent to Each Loan and Letter of Credit) have been satisfied in connection with the Issuance of any Letter of Credit.
Provided, however, that a Party may grant waiver from satisfaction of any Condition Precedent by the other Party in accordance with the provisions of Clauses 4.1.2 or 4.1.3, as the case may be, and to the extent of such waiver, that Condition Precedent shall be deemed to be fulfilled for the purposes of this Clause 4.1.1.
Additional Conditions Precedent: None Current Termination Date for Addendum: The “Current Termination Date” under the Credit Agreement.
More Definitions of Precedent
Precedent means the conditions precedent in clause 3.1.Control has the meaning given to that term in section 50AA of the Corporations Act and Controlling and Controlled has the corresponding meaning.Convertible Securities means the Piedmont Options and Piedmont Performance Rights.Corporations Act means the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Corporations Regulations means the Corporations Regulations 2001. Court means the Supreme Court of Western Australia.Deed Poll means the deed poll to be entered into by US Holdco the form of which is contained in Schedule 3 or in such other form as agreed in writing between Piedmont and US Holdco.Effect means, when used in relation to the Scheme, the coming into effect pursuant to section 411(10) of the Corporations Act of the order of the Court made under section 411(4)(b) of the Corporations Act in relation to the Scheme and Effective has a corresponding meaning.Effective Date means the date the Scheme becomes Effective.Encumbrance means any encumbrance, mortgage, pledge, charge, lien, assignment, hypothecation, security interest, title retention, preferential right or trust arrangement and any other security arrangement of any kind given or created and including any possessory lien in the ordinary course of business whether arising by law or contract.End Date means 30 June 2021, or such later date as agreed to in writing between the parties.Excluded Shares means any Piedmont Shares held by an Excluded Shareholder.Excluded Shareholder means US Holdco and its Affiliates.Excluded Small Parcel Holder means a Small Parcel Holder who has made a valid election referred to in clause 4.7 to not participate in the Sale Facility and will not be treated as a Small Parcel Holder. Scheme Implementation Deed Reference: CS: 0000000 Legal/74196433_16
Precedent means a (legal) decision which can subsequently act as a guide in similar situations or cases. A precedent can also be a case that is governing for the processing of other similar cases. This usually involves administrative resolutions, i.e. individual resolutions passed in accordance with the administrative area of the body concerned which contain a legal opinion that is subsequently used as a basis in other similar cases. It must therefore be possible for fundamental decisions linked to different case areas to be established in an appropriate manner and made available to executive officers.
Precedent means the historical decisions of the Elections’ Committee;
Precedent means a court decision in an earlier case with facts and legal issues similar to a dispute currently before a court. Judges will generally "follow precedent" - meaning that they use the principles established in earlier cases to decide new cases that have similar facts and raise similar legal issues. A judge will disregard precedent if a party can show that the earlier case was wrongly decided, or that it differed in some significant way from the current case.
Precedent means a prior court decision that has addressed the same issue that a new case requires a court to address.
Precedent means a decided case that furnishes a basis for determining later cases involving similar facts or issues.30
Precedent in this context means, existing constitutional structures surely provide multiple mechanisms by which presidential practice can influence future executive branch conduct. Judicial actors rely on practice as gloss on constitutional meaning; executive branch officials rely on past practice in guiding institutional norms of behavior; elected officials outside the executive branch and the People themselves draw on past practice to help evaluate the political legitimacy of presidential conduct in the present day. Yet while the prospect of precedential impact surely exists, it is equally apparent that not every executive action ends up having any of these effects. Quite the contrary, from the Roosevelt Administration’s action targeting Japanese- Americans on the basis of race, to President Nixon’s behavior in the Saturday Night Massacre, one might equally hypothesize the existence of an executive branch anticanon of sorts – executive actions that have produced none of the standard precedential effects, save inasmuch as they have served to establish an interpretive or normative understanding rejecting such executive behavior. Identifying how certain instances of presidential practice achieve such anticanonical status seems today an especially pressing exercise. In addition to helping refine our thinking about the interpretive impact of presidential practice on constitutional meaning, establishing how anticanonical status is achieved may help clarify the agreed-on scope of at least some of the norms of democratic governance that have proven rich fodder in recent years for “constitutional hardball” – resort to practices that are technically constitutional, but that one might once have thought run afoul of normative principles of governance that could “’go without saying.’” Surfacing the existence of anticanonical practice can likewise help guard against the prospect that disfavored presidential behaviors might reset default normative expectations among government officials and the public, expectations that tend to assume because past presidents have taken some action, future presidents can defensibly take the same approach. And tracing anticanonical development can help to identify pathways for forestalling emergent presidential precedent from developing. Examining anticanonical development through several concrete examples, this Article aims to demonstrate how presidential “precedent” is established less by presidential action, more by systemic reaction to what pr...